isms

“How do Socialism, Communism, Fascism, and Libertarianism (and any other "isms") fit into 5 forms you listed early in your post?”

Thanks for asking. I have neither read anything in relation to this nor thought about it before, but here's what I've come up with. I hope you don’t mind if I take a long detour in reply.

Capitalism, Socialism, Communism and Fascism are economic (as well as political) systems; Libertarianism and Authoritarianism (or Statism) are political philosophies. There are others, of course, but these are the relevant categories at this point in history.

Capitalism is based on the principle of individual rights and the belief that individuals working to benefit themselves and their families and engaging in trade will create the greatest benefit for all. It is characterized by private ownership of capital.

In a Socialist system a centralized government owns all capital and controls the economy by means of regulation and legislation.  In theory Socialism is a temporary intermediate stage in the progression toward the ultimate goal of communism.

Fascism is similar to socialism:

The main characteristic of socialism (and of communism) is public ownership of the means of production, and, therefore, the abolition of private property. The right to property is the right of use and disposal. Under fascism, men retain the semblance or pretense of private property, but the government holds total power over its use and disposal . . . .

Under fascism, citizens retain the responsibilities of owning property, without freedom to act and without any of the advantages of ownership. Under socialism, government officials acquire all the advantages of ownership, without any of the responsibilities, since they do not hold title to the property, but merely the right to use it—at least until the next purge. In either case, the government officials hold the economic, political and legal power of life or death over the citizens . . . .*

In a Communist system ownership and control of the economy is by the people as a collective and government is no longer necessary. A true Communist system has never existed. Nations have always fallen during the Socialism stage in every time and place that it has ever been implemented.

On the spectrum of political philosophy, all people believe in various levels of self-government. An extreme Libertarian believes that individuals should have complete moral and economic self-government while an extreme Authoritarian (Statist) believe that individuals should have no moral and economic self-government, but rather ought to be completely controlled by the State. Most of us are somewhere in the middle.

Now to answer your question. A pure Libertarian would prefer Anarchy. A Monarchy or an Oligarchy, because it needs to maintain power, will always be Statist. A Democracy seems at first to be Libertarian, but the majority will always vote to benefit themselves at the expense of the minority, therefore becoming Statist. The only form of Government in which Authoritarianism is restrained is a Republic. This is because everyone is obligated to follow the Law. The only way around this is to corrupt the people and/or the system in such a way that it no longer functions.

Economic systems are servants of political philosophy. The more Authoritarian the philosophy is, the more Socialist or Fascist the economic system will be. The more Libertarian the philosophy is, the more Capitalist the economic system will be. Very rarely is any philosophy or economic system pure. Usually it falls somewhere on a broad spectrum.

For decades the two major political parties have both stood on the Authoritarian end of the spectrum. One is simply moving faster toward Statism than the other. Click here to take a quick quiz to see where you stand.

2006 House rankings. The one at the top is Ron Paul, with Jeff Flake slightly lower and to the right. Red is Republican, blue is Democrat. Notice how nearly all fall toward the Authoritarian (Statist) side.

*the Fascist New Frontier, The Ayn Rand Column, 98